PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (text of measure as introduced: CR S6795-6796)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jun 29, 2006
Railroad Antitrust Enforcement Act of 2006 - Amends the Clayton Act to grant the United States exclusive authority to bring suit for injunctive relief against a common carrier that is not a rail common carrier subject to the jurisdiction the Surface Transportation Board (STB).
Revises the declaration that prohibitions against mergers and acquisitions that tend to create monopolies shall not apply to certain transactions duly consummated pursuant to specified federal authority. Excepts specified rate agreements between two or more rail carriers (collective rate agreements) and certain transactions, including railroad mergers and acquisitions, from specified antitrust exemptions.
Provides that, in any civil action against a rail common carrier, the U.S. district court shall not be required to defer to the primary jurisdiction of the STB.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Empowers the Federal Trade Commission to regulate, and engage in antitrust enforcement regarding, collective rate agreements and certain transactions, including railroad mergers and acquisitions.
Applies to rail common carriers subject to STB jurisdiction requirements governing the amount of recovery or prejudgment interest (treble damages) by injured persons, without regard to whether: (1) such railroads have filed rates; or (2) a complaint has been filed that challenges a rate.
Amends federal transportation law to terminate the exemptions from antitrust laws for collective ratemaking agreements.
Requires the STB, and other reviewing agencies, when reviewing a proposed agreement, to take into account its impact upon shippers, consumers, and affected communities.
Revises STB authority to provide that a rail carrier, corporation, or a person participating in an approved transaction is not exempt from specified antitrust laws.
People & committees
Sen. Kohl, Herb [D-WI] · D–WI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (text of measure as introduced: CR S6795-6796)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S6794-6795)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.3612 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.3612 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.3612 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.3612 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.